You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #23: Unindicted coconspirator, amateur lawyer. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
gparty62 Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-30-07 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. Unindicted coconspirator, amateur lawyer.
http://morosehellhole.blogspot.com/2007/11/leeland-eli-...
says...
Leeland Eli Eisenberg
Unindicted coconspirator, amateur lawyer.

http://www.mass.gov/obcbbo/bd03-018.htm

A petition for discipline was filed by Bar Counsel on January 3, 2002, against the Respondent, Isaiah Shalom, alleging four counts of misconduct. Count One alleged that the Respondent engaged in multiple violations of the disciplinary rules in connection with his representation of a client in a civil case against a car dealer. Count Two alleged that the Respondent entered into an agreement to split legal fees with a non-attorney. Count Three charged that the Respondent assisted inmates in various prisons to violate regulations prohibiting inmates from engaging in monetary transactions with each other. Count Four alleged that the Respondent commingled client and personal funds and converted client funds to his own use. The Respondent filed an answer on January 18, 2002.

snip...

Count Two Conclusions of Law

34. Bar Counsel charges that by agreeing to pay a referral and/or finders fee to Eisenberg and to make further payment to Eisenberg at the successful conclusion of the case, the Respondent violated Mass.R.Prof.C. 5.4(a) (lawyer shall not share fees with nonlawyer) and 7.2(c) (lawyer shall not give anything of value to person for recommending the lawyers services). The Respondent contends that because Bar Counsel did not provide any evidence that he made any of the payments contemplated by the agreement, he did not violate the charged rules. While the Respondent plainly intended to violate Mass.R.Prof.C. 5.4(a) and 7.2(c), the fortuity that the offer and counter-offer did not amount to a completed illegal deal appears to preclude a conclusion that such violation occurred here.

Count Three Findings of Fact

35. At all times relevant to the petition, DOC regulations prohibited inmates from iving money or any item of value to, or accepting money or any item of value from another inmate, a member of his family or his friend, without authorization. 103 C.M.R. 430.24(25). The Respondent knew that assisting inmates in transferring anything of value among them violated this regulation (Ex. 42, pp. 26, 27, 53, Ex. 43, p. 9). DOC regulations also prohibited inmates from harging or receiving money or anything of value, either directly or indirectly, from another inmate, a member of his family, or any other person, for rendering legal assistance. 103 C.M.R. 430.24(30). The Respondent knew that inmates could not charge or receive anything of value from other inmates for rendering legal assistance without violating this regulation (Ex. 42, pp. 45-47, Ex. 43, p. 9). Finally, DOC regulations prohibited ttempting to commit any of the above offenses, making plans to commit any of the above offenses or aiding another person to commit any of the above offenses shall be considered the same as the commission of the offense itself. 103 C.M.R. 430.24(33).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC